Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Open Source Automatic Speech Recognition for German

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1807.10311 v1 pith:LK7KCXAE submitted 2018-07-26 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords germandatafreelymodelacousticavailablemodelsspeech
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

High quality Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) is a prerequisite for speech-based applications and research. While state-of-the-art ASR software is freely available, the language dependent acoustic models are lacking for languages other than English, due to the limited amount of freely available training data. We train acoustic models for German with Kaldi on two datasets, which are both distributed under a Creative Commons license. The resulting model is freely redistributable, lowering the cost of entry for German ASR. The models are trained on a total of 412 hours of German read speech data and we achieve a relative word error reduction of 26% by adding data from the Spoken Wikipedia Corpus to the previously best freely available German acoustic model recipe and dataset. Our best model achieves a word error rate of 14.38 on the Tuda-De test set. Due to the large amount of speakers and the diversity of topics included in the training data, our model is robust against speaker variation and topic shift.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Breaking the Transcription Bottleneck: Fine-tuning ASR Models for Extremely Low-Resource Fieldwork Languages

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Fine-tuned MMS outperforms XLS-R on fieldwork ASR with less than one hour of training data, while XLS-R reaches parity beyond one hour.

Pith tools